national

Health fallout from Fukushima mainly mental: studies

49 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

49 Comments
Login to comment

No worries, at least they're living in a country renowned for its mental health care and lack of stigma attached to mental illness....lol

3 ( +14 / -12 )

Its hard to believe that there will be no physical side effects given Chernobyl. I guess only the inhabitants of Fukushima will really no as there is no way this will be reported in the Japan press.

2 ( +10 / -8 )

@kawabegawa198

Thank you for your support and comprehension of Japan, its people, culture and current situation. We appreciate highly your very kind and obviously sincere concern.

5 ( +14 / -8 )

In contrast to the 1986 explosion in Chernobyl that provoked an increase in thyroid cancer among children in affected areas and perhaps other cancers yet to be detected, the Fukushima debacle is unlikely to cause hikes in cancer rates due to radiation exposure, according the a 2013 UN scientific report.

UN report seems according to a lot of experts misguided as it relies on false data largely manipulated by the Japanese government notably because the radiation data are not reliable. It's not possible to establish a direct link between the increase of thyroid cancer and the Fukushima disaster yet BUT an oversight committee looking at the health of people living in Fukushima has determined that:

1) the thyroid cancer rate in young people has jumped by an astounding 6,000% throughout the region since the disaster first occurred back in 2011.

2) there is a strong similarity between the age profiles of patients diagnosed during the period of latency after Chernobyl in Ukraine and currently in Fukushima.

So some real questions remain here and until relievable data is available (which may be never), no final conclusion can be made. But one can still wonder that such an increase is disturbing.

Now, it also been reported that the difficulties in tracking back the reason of this increase is the regional government actively blocked such research from being conducted in the days and weeks following the disaster, an university professor reporting that he was stopped in trying to measure exposure levels after the explosions by the Fukushima Prefecture, which accused him of stirring up trouble. Sounds Japanese to me, isn't it?

However another professor could measure 65 Fukushima residents one month after the disaster and 77% of them had radioactive iodine in their thyroid.

-3 ( +11 / -14 )

The JT headline article: "Health fallout from Fukushima mainly mental" comes across as being negative.It felt like it said,it's all in their heads.Things aren't that bad.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Moreover, the mental health toll comes not only from the trauma of dislocation and the spectre of harmful radiation, but from deficiencies in the way civic and health officials managed the crisis, the articles argued.

And yet nobody has been held responsible for all the mismanagement... Expect more in the future when the next disaster occurs as public and corporate officials can act (of not act) with impunity.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Its hard to believe that there will be no physical side effects given Chernobyl. I guess only the inhabitants of Fukushima will really no as there is no way this will be reported in the Japan press.

I agree, my friend lives there and he's complaining that one of his testicles is bigger than the other two.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

the thyroid cancer rate in young people has jumped by an astounding 6,000% throughout the region since the disaster first occurred back in 2011

links? what "committee?" when?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@kickboard

This was reported by the Asahi Shinbun a few months ago.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Thank you for your support and comprehension of Japan, its people, culture and current situation. We appreciate highly your very kind and obviously sincere concern.

No problem, newbie.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

I agree with daito_hak. My husband has been constantly following any information he can get outside the mainstream news - reports on cancers, sudden death and heart attacks in younger people, climbing death rates, etc. It's not good, and it's not only in Fukushima. Watch what you eat if you live in east Japan. Very little, If any of that kind of informations has been, or ever will be, covered in the mainstream news - the ones tied to the nuclear industry.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

This was reported by the Asahi Shinbun a few months ago.

If it is only a few months ago, you should be able to provide a link.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Radiation fallout trigger mental health fallout but what about money fallout for victims of Fukushima disaster.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

One more time-

Radiation detected inside reactor:

Fukushima 72.9 Sv/h Chernobyl 300Sv/h

Total radiation released:

Fukushima 340 to 800 PBq Chernobyl 5,200 PBq

Fukushima is not Chernobyl. Regarding 137Cs levels-

" No significant amount was released at Three Mile Island because it was filtered out; but at Chernobyl, 85 PBq were scattered over the surrounding area. It has a half life of 30 years, which is a really long time; and it's why we're probably going to have to wait for a few more 30-year half lives to go by before the area around Chernobyl will be safe to move back in. At Fukushima, 137Cs was in the smoke from burning fuel and was in the cooling water sprayed into the damaged cores. A maximum of 15 PBq, just over a sixth as much as Chernobyl, was released into the environment"

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@Sueume, see:

http://enenews.com/

http://netc.com/ (Japan)

1 ( +3 / -2 )

"Our oceans contain one and a half billion cubic kilometers of water. Dilute Fukushima's 4.7 kilograms into that, and every cubic kilometer of water would contain less than one thousandth of a lethal dose. In other words, to die from Fukushima's radiation, you will need to drink one thousand cubic kilometers of seawater, and somehow manage to absorb every atom of 137Cs from it. But if you're looking only to eventually get cancer, then you might be able to do so on only a few hundred cubic kilometers of the Pacific.

But if you tried to do that, you would already die one million times over from just the primordial radioactive elements that exist naturally in our oceans; more than 15 zettabecquerels (a million petabecquerels) of naturally occurring potassium-40, rubidium-87, uranium-238, and so on."

2 ( +7 / -5 )

But health impacts have been limited. In contrast to the 1986 explosion in Chernobyl that provoked an increase in thyroid cancer among children in affected areas and perhaps other cancers yet to be detected, the Fukushima debacle is unlikely to cause hikes in cancer rates due to radiation exposure, according the a 2013 UN scientific report.

It's been three decades since Chernobyl, but only less than five years since Tohoku. Who knows for sure what will happen in the coming quarter century?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Who knows for sure what will happen in the coming quarter century?

It's not unknown, it's quite predictable from the radiation levels. Since the bombs were dropped, a great deal has been learned about radiation and it's effects on the human body.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

In these types of studies, really the government can use whatever data they want. Also, they are trying to ignore the thyroid cancer cases. Kids are developing thyroid cancer and the mothers are trying to be heard. The government is just saying that the cases cannot be proven to be caused from Fukushima, despite the spike.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

"Let’s compare that to the isotopic levels we would find in the Pacific Ocean if Fukushima never happened. Here are the top five… (1) 1 - Uranium, isotopes 238 and 235 = 22 million-trillion Bq 2 – Potassium-40 = 7.4 billion-trillion Bq 3 – Tritium (Hydrogen-3) = 370 thousand-trillion Bq 4 – Carbon-14 = 3 million-trillion Bq 5 – Rubidium-87 = 700 million-trillion Bq."

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Sueume,

Watch what you eat if you live in east Japan.

That kind of rubbish advice is one of the stress sources for people in Tohoku. My advice is eat what you want, municipalities, prefectures and government agencies all check produce.

If you want to help Fukushima, eat their food - I do.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Jessica, if in the past 50 years children were never given thyroid scans, and then you scan every child in a certain area, you're going to find cancers you have never been looking for before. That is part of the spike. We'll see what happens from here.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

sudden death and heart attacks in younger people, climbing death rates, etc. It's not good, and it's not only in Fukushima. Watch what you eat if you live in east Japan.

Sudden death, increased heart attacks, strokes etc were seen in Kobe as well, with no radiation. Stress levels endured in situations like these, where people lose loved ones, homes and their livelihoods can be devastating to people's health. One such event is considered highly stressful.

Here is a stress scale. I did it, checking off the possible events in one person's life in Tohoku, worst case scenario (which covers thousands of people) in which so many lost their spouse, one of more family members, their house and job-'Losing spouse' 'losing family member' 'change in financial status' 'changes in sleep patterns' 'changes in living conditions' 'changes in number of arguments with spouse (for remaining family members) and got a score of 347, which indicates the real possibility of illness.

http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTCS_82.htm

Radiation doesn't cause heart attacks, stroke, and other things we're seeing in the region that are clearly stress-related.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Many of the commenters here seem to be either living in fantasy land or haven't done their research. Fukushima is much worse than what some of you say. "The health risks were calculated by applying conservative assumptions, including the conservative linear no-threshold model of radiation exposure, a model that assumes even the smallest amount of radiation exposure will cause a negative health effect.[199][200] The report indicated that for those infants in the most affected areas, lifetime cancer risk would increase by about 1%.[198][201] It predicted that populations in the most contaminated areas faced a 70% higher relative risk of developing thyroid cancer for females exposed as infants, and a 7% higher relative risk of leukemia in males exposed as infants and a 6% higher relative risk of breast cancer in females exposed as infants.[14] One-third of involved emergency workers would have increased cancer risks.[202][203] Cancer risks for fetuses were similar to those in 1 year old infants.[204] The estimated cancer risk to children and adults was lower than infants.[205]" Also, there are studies that show the dose of radiation does not really matter, it's the medium through which it travels through and its half life that is the indicator for cancer and infertility risk. For example, ingesting and breathing in radiation is worse than exposure through the skin (transdermal). So don't eat Japanese fish and don't breathe Fukushima/eastern Japanese air.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Well, first, it takes years for cancers to show up, so it's too soon to make conclusions of safety or risk.

Some problems have been detected (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/02/13/national/fukushima-child-tests-positive-for-thyroid-cancer-in-second-survey/#.VbuGPO69LYU) but since there is no great database of low radiation events, it is not going to be easy to establish a scientific connection that proves a causal connection, even if there were no political pressure to say everything is fine.

Right now, they are finding thyroid problems and saying there is no connection with Fukushima, but what they mean is that they can't prove it is from Fukushima. Maybe, they say, it's just that increased testing turned up more cancers because more people were tested than before. It will be a while before anything can be proven, and it's too soon for anyone to have such a glowingly positive outlook.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

"mainly mental" ?? Are YOU mental? How much radioactive water is STILL gushing into the ocean?

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Radiation damages the DNA or chromosomes of cells causing cancer, mutations, deformities, etc. There are no simple tests for all cancer. Each type of cancer can require specific tests. Many Japanese from the Fukushima areas could have cancer and radiation damages but do not know they have them. In the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine, and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in the USA, people living near the areas are "permanently evacuated", not allowed to return to live. Japanese government "should" do the same for Fukushima residents. Government-sponsored and nuclear-operator-sponsored studies tend to play down the effects of radiation on statistical incidence of leukemia, cancers, etc, to reduce or avoid claims of injuries and damages. It is easier to prove radiation damages using babies with deformities born after the accident, plants and animals with abnormal parts or growths around the reactor areas, etc. Fukushima residents should sue to get compensation for permanent relocation and future cancer-related medical expenses.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

In some place on earth, the natural radiation is even higher than that near the fukushima plant, and yet, the expected life span is just as normal or even longer. http://webecoist.momtastic.com/2013/01/22/hot-spots-earths-5-most-naturally-radioactive-places/

STOP your unnecessary fear please, people.

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

Gob...pretty funny nutty comment.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@pronuke1

"Natural radiation" doesn't contain strains of Cesium. The bottom line is the public doesn't believe articles like this one. The situation won't change until the Japanese government provides trustworthy international environmental / health organizations complete and unfettered access to conduct independent research which shows the radiation poses minimal health risks. We all know the reasons why the Japanese government refuses to do so. Property values and the national economy would collapse of the public knew the truth. The government would also lose the opportunity to exploit Japanese taxpayers with the 2020 Olympics.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

@Hi Majin. ..yes radiation released was substantially lower than chernobyl and the authorities were substantially more stringent than the soviets in terms of allowing contaminated food into the market.

@westerner....no science tells us one thing and that is that the scale of disaster in Fukushima is nowhere near as bad as many on here have claimed. Theres a constant message from the International science community. A 7% increase in risk of something which is incredibly low in the first place is a very negligible increase. Who covered this a couple of years ago when they concluded that there would be few health problems as a result of this.

Again @him akin. ..don't forget the sudden deaths in Miyagi and iwate as well. Not radiation related but due to losing everything in the tsunami. They are quickly becoming the forgotten victims of this.

Only 1% of the radiation in the Pacific comes from Fukushima based on international studies.

As other studies have shown food in the region is back to pre disaster levels. For reasons I genuinely can't comprehend many contributor on here want this to be a wrose disaster than it is.

Many international scientists and governments have concluded that those fears are irrational, incorrect and very unscientific.

Oh and I neither live in Japan nor Chernobyl in case anyone feels the need to bring that into the conversation. But then neither is Geraldine Thomas nor the Lancet.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

6000% increase in cancers among children living near Fukushima prefecture: http://enenews.com/officials-6000-increase-thyroid-cancer-rate-among-fukushima-children-asahi-16-new-cases-detected-first-3-months-2015-professor-urgent-countermeasures-against-suspected-outbreak-necessary-govt?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ENENews+%28Energy+News%29

I know this is enenews but they give the references in that website. Have a read and see why Fukushima is more dangerous to the Japanese public than you might want to believe.

99% of the Japanese people I've talked to have a very different opinion from Himajin and Heda Madness.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

That's also been covered to death...of you test to the nth degree you will find every single discrepancy. Same in other parts of Japan. There will be increases in cancer. Thyroid cancer, if discovered early enough is almost 100 percent treatable. These are simplemented facts

Just as there was substantially less radiation than chernobyl. That the food wasn't contaminated to the levels in chernobyl etc etc etc

And if 99% of Japanese have a different opinion to the science community that explains why the biggest risk is fear of radiation not radiation itself.

Ever wonder why the negative articles are all on enenews but never in lancet etc?

And apart from the headline...where does the 6000% come from?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Set up data to achieve a desired result, lather, rinse, repeat. About as "accurate" as the UNSCEAR studies.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Westerner,

So don't eat Japanese fish and don't breathe Fukushima/eastern Japanese air.

You are part of the problem with statements like that.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

1) the thyroid cancer rate in young people has jumped by an astounding 6,000% throughout the region since the disaster first occurred back in 2011.

Because everyone is screened now. If your figure is accurate, which I doubt, it would be an increase in detection, not in incidence.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

You can live by the mainstream media's word, or you can do a bit of investigating. You can support Fukushima by eating their produce, or you can go to rallies and meetings (largely unpublicized, but not impossible to find if you look), as my husband has and hear first hand from Fukushima residents about how they have been threatened and bullied into silence about what they are going through. He sat and listened to women who were shunned by their families, who's husbands were told they would lose their jobs if they didn't keep their wives quiet, told that they were traitors for not wanting to eat the local food, etc.. This exists, and there is a reason you don't hear about it on TV.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Sueume,

I have friends and collegues from Fukushima, and their experience is completely opposite to that you have detailed. People evacuating, claims of massive cancer outbreaks, but after 4 years - they have seen that these claims are false. It's always in a nearby town, but in their own communities - nothing.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Good thing Japan has world class mental health services then isn't it?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@kyushubill

"Good thing Japan has world class mental health services then isn't it?"

I’m ecstatic...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

99% of the Japanese people I've talked to have a very different opinion from Himajin and Heda Madness.

And? 'All my friends share my opinion' does not make it any more true. Your own source says -

" The 16 new cases were detected between January and March, and bring the total number of young people diagnosed with the disease in the testing program to 103… 127 [have been diagnosed or suspected of having thyroid cancer]… many cases of thyroid cancer in infants were reported after the 1986 Chernobyl disaster. However, this has not proven to be the case so far with regard to the Fukushima nuclear crisis.

103 people diagnosed as of 2015. '6000% increase' sounds as if there are armies of thyroid patients out there, there are 103.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

"Health fallout from Fukushima mainly mental: studies"

Just what I needed to know, great! Terrific!

http://www.rt.com/op-edge/200107-fukushima-japan-tepco-nuclear-disaster/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Farmboy,

Right now, they are finding thyroid problems and saying there is no connection with Fukushima, but what they mean is that they can't prove it is from Fukushima. Maybe, they say, it's just that increased testing turned up more cancers because more people were tested than before. It will be a while before anything can be proven, and it's too soon for anyone to have such a glowingly positive outlook.

But the same procedures were used in three other prefecures far from Fukushima. They found Fukushima's detection rate was not only normal, but lower than those three. Genetic testing of the thyroid cancers has also shown them to be of the normal varieties, and having no radiogenic markers.

Heda,

Only 1% of the radiation in the Pacific comes from Fukushima based on international studies.

It's actually much lower than that. If you crunch the numbers in Prof. Ken Buessler's article "Fukushima and Ocean Radioactivity" you get 0.0006%. if we're just comparing cs-137, then it's 0.001%

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Star viking it may well be, I was quoting something I read recently but it may well be lower than that. But either way it's substantially lower than the JT community seems to think.

By the way. I don't live in the Pacific Ocean either just in case anyone wants to bring up my locale as a reason that my opinion is irrelevant.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Since when did the mind stop being a part of the physical body? You can't have one without the other -- at least not yet. Anything mental IS physical, when it comes to problems and suffering.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Smithinjapan,

Since when did the mind stop being a part of the physical body? You can't have one without the other -- at least not yet. Anything mental IS physical, when it comes to problems and suffering.

That is not being argued about here. The problem is that people are being showered with Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt - the mental effect of that is, of course, having a physical effect. The physical effect is not only stress, but coping mechanisms to deal with stress: overeating, smoking, drinking, and generally not looking after oneself. For families, oppressive atmospheres and domestic violence will be more common.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Star-Viking: You're preaching to the choir, my friend. I'm saying any claims the damage is mostly mental and not physical does absolutely nothing to absolve the guilty parties of any guilt -- as mental IS physical, and needless to say even if one DOES believe them to be truly separate, that person cannot deny in the least the effect stress and damage on one has on the other. BUT, the powers that be could easily take such a report, conclude that they are not responsible for doing anything wrong but the people themselves are the problem because it's all in their heads, and then do more damage by stopping compensation and what not.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If humans had the breeding frequency of insects then we might be able to see similar results to those found in aphids under a study conducted by scientists at the university of Hakkaido. Abnormalities were found in 10%. This is a direct result of the radiation escape from the nuclear plants. Extrapolating this to the human population is a huge leap bearing in mind that the insects were sampled in a very contaminated zone.So, there are proven effects (physical) on life in Fukushima At present it is known that radiation is still escaping from the plants and that it is also known that radiation builds up in the environment. To conduct a study on the human population on aborted fetuses (numbers) or birth deformities would show a causal link to the radioactive disasters. These figures no doubt exist, collection of data now and into the future,will either show a case for or against the deleterious effects of radiation. As one poster here remarked it is still too early make a conclusion-I agree with that.....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Did the aphids go through the same food.quarantine restrictions that the humans went through. Did the aphids go through the same bongo zone that the humans went through? As a study it's interesting. At least compared to other studies on aphids.

As a study relating to health effects on human beings it is not remotely relevant.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites